A Lesson from Greece

by: Bryan Baumgart

November 7, 2012 

In late 2009, Greece had found itself removed from a long period of unprecedented economic prosperity and cast into the throes of a severe economic collapse. The Greek Ministry of Finance, in a 2010 report “Stability and Growth Program” highlighted FIVE main causes of the economic collapse.

1.   GDP plunged due to lack of competition in the private sector.

(Gross Domestic Product is the total value of all goods and services produced over a specific time period, usually calculated by adding the total income or the total amount spent by a nation).

2.   Budget Deficits skyrocketed when spending over a six year period (from 2004 to 2009) dramatically outpaced income, mostly to finance public sector jobs, pensions, and other social benefits.

3.   Government Debt Levels reached unsustainable sizes. Debt levels rose so dramatically that in April 2010, rating agencies downgraded the Greek economy to “junk status”, which caused the private capital market to freeze and bailout loans (from IMF) were required to avoid default.

4.   Budget Compliance was nonexistent.

5.   Statistical Credibility was compromised. To keep within monetary guidelines, the government misreported official economic statistics, even paying Goldman Sachs and other banks for helping them hide the actual level of borrowing. Flawed statistics made it impossible to predict accurate GDP growth, budget deficits, and public debt which turned out to be far worse than anticipated. Trust among financial investors was lost.

In May of 2010, Greece avoided default when the IMF (International Monetary Fund) agreed to a bailout of $163 billion dollars (110 billion euros). The conditions of the bailout required Greece to comply with:

1.      Implementing austerity measures (cutting spending on benefits and public services/welfare).

2.      Privatizing government assets worth $68 billion dollars (50 billion euros) by 2015.

3.      Implementing outlined structural reforms aimed at improving market competitiveness and growth (moving the public sector back to the private sector).

Greece failed to comply quickly enough and another bailout of $171 billion dollars (130 billion euros) was required and offered in February of 2012, with a requirement of even further austerity measures (more cuts to benefits and public services/welfare), a rise in taxes, and even more privatization reform.

The tax increases resulted in record numbers of Greek businesses going bankrupt. In 2011, Greece lost a total of 111,000 businesses (up 27% from 2010). The unemployment rate jumped from 7.5% in 2008 to over 25% in July of 2012. During that same period, the youth unemployment rate skyrocketed from 22% to 55%.

As Jon Henley stated in a March 2012 issue of The Guardian:

“In an economy without a welfare regime to speak of, the impact of five consecutive years of recession has taken its toll. Charitable foundations that used to fund educational programs have taken a big hit themselves and have now shifted to paying for soup kitchens. Neighborhoods are marked by buildings that owners are desperate to sell or rent and a major increase in the homeless sleeping rough. Almost half of Greece's young people are unemployed, as are one in five of their older peers. Despondency is everywhere, despite the "rescue". If future Greek governments keep to the terms of the bailout, by 2020 public debt will be back to what is was when the crisis erupted in 2009.”

But the leftist government of Greece refuses to face reality.  They have promised to hire at least 100,000 more people in the public sector, to restore all the budget cuts made over the past two years, and to offer free health care and social services to all illegal immigrants. To date, no real reforms have occurred in Greece. Not a single privatization has taken place. There have been no important changes in the labor market and no simplification of the tax system. Instead, the government has put nearly all of its energy into squeezing more taxes out of the overregulated private sector. The economy is in its fifth year of contraction, half of all young people are unemployed, the suicide rate is going up by double digits every year, and hundreds of thousands of people working in the private sector have not been paid for months.

Greece snubbed a policy of wealth creation for a policy of borrowing and subsidies. They have now reached such high levels of debt and government dependency that a realistic solution to their economic crisis is impossible.  Riots and violence rage every time necessary spending cuts are made, because the citizens of Greece are now completely dependent on social assistance. The UN warned that Greece may be charged with human rights violations if necessary cuts are made as citizens could be left without food, water or shelter. The only solution is temporary; borrow while you can because it’s only a matter of time before it all comes crashing down! Then human rights go out the window and chaos ensues!

 

How does the United States compare to our European neighbors? Much like Greece, we found ourselves plunging from prosperity into an economic crisis in 2008, brought on by manipulation of economic statistics by the government backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the removal of market competition allowing Fannie and Freddie to issue high risk loans without fear of failure.

Since our plunge into recession we have acted much in the same manner as Greece, repeatedly bailing out private companies branded “too big to fail” with tax dollars, and removing competition by nationalizing private industries from banking and mortgage to school loans and healthcare.  

Over the past four years the United States has dramatically increased government dependency, setting records for disability and food stamp rolls. Under the Obama administration, just short of 15 million people have been added to food stamp rolls while total welfare spending has already exceeded $1 trillion dollars annually.

The country’s debt has increased by $5.63 trillion dollars leaving us over $16 trillion dollars in debt.  For every $1 dollar added to the economy, this administration has added $3 dollars in debt. We have carried an annual deficit over $1 trillion dollars each of the four years Obama has been in office. Like Greece, much of the deficit has stemmed from entitlements and outrageous pensions and benefits packages cut over crony deals between elected officials and union leadership. Our debt has become such a liability that in September the United States joined Greece in having its credit rating downgraded.

Much like Greece, we have not complied with a budget. In fact, this administration has not even passed a budget since President Obama took office. Our country’s sluggish GDP figures (well below the 3.5% annual growth indicating an improving economy) indicate the poor jobs situation won’t improve anytime soon. So many people have given up hope looking for jobs the BLO actually dropped the unemployment rate down to 7.9%. The actual number of Americans whom now are without jobs totals almost 27 million for a REAL unemployment rate of 14.6%. The actual youth unemployment rate pushes 17%. Yet, for every ONE job created, 75 Americans have been placed on food stamp rolls.

The President’s signature achievement, Obamacare, hasn’t even kicked in yet and employers have begun involuntarily dropping employees down to part time to avoid the fines they would face under the law; potentially leaving up to 5.9 million Americans without benefits. Not that medical coverage would do Americans any good, as Bloomberg points out, the United States is looking at a doctor shortage exceeding 15, 230 primary care physicians alone under the new healthcare law.

Much like in Greece, austerity efforts to curb spending in the United States were met with strikes and resistance. Inflation is up, food and gas prices are way up, tuition and insurance preimiums continue to skyrocket, and household income continues to plunge.

Yesterday, voters turned down Governor Romney’s policies to create wealth in favor of continuing President Obama’s policies of increases in taxation, entitlement spending, and borrowing. As we approach the fiscal cliff early next year, our government faces the same predicament Greece did. Experts widely agree, if the tax hikes and cuts to public spending are allowed to kick in, the country will likely fall in to a much deeper recession.  Like Greece, the United States has reached the point of no return, and there is no indication that we will choose a different strategy.

*Where does Greece stand today?

Headlines from USA Today (November 6, 2012): “Strike Hits Greece in Bid to Derail Austerity Plan”

Demand Better Representation, Split the Electoral Votes!!!

by: Bryan Baumgart - November 9, 2012

The time has come to pursue a split of electoral votes in every state. It's not a hard sell. Americans crave and deserve better representation!!!

The current system of electing our president, "The Electoral College" grants each state one electoral vote for each Congressional Representative (US House of Representatives) and one electoral vote for each representative in the US Senate.

Most states employ a "winner takes all" method (except for Nebraska and Maine) in which they grant ALL of their electoral votes to the presidential candidate that wins the popular vote of their state. This "winner takes all" method is not mandated by the Constitution but is decided by the states. Nebraska and Maine stand as shining examples of better representation as they choose to split their electoral votes, allocating one electoral vote to the candidate that receives the most votes in each congressional district (the remaining two electoral votes are allocated to the state's winner of the popular vote).

A prime motive of the Electoral College was to ensure less populated regions of the country are not ignored and still receive representation.

In reviewing recent elections it is clear that intention has not been met. Every four years the candidates and media focus their attention on a few "battle ground states". The rest of the nation is relegated to staring at our television screens and hoping that Ohio or Florida make the right decision for the rest of us. Partisan volunteers from each state make phone calls to residents in Ohio hoping to sway their votes. Voter fraud strategies are concentrated on those battle ground states making it easier to compromise or even steal and election. The balance of power in the United States now rests in the hands of a select few states. This can't be what our forefathers intended.

How many trips to California, New York or Chicago did Governor Romney make? How many trips to Texas did President Obama make? How many trips to conservative San Diego did Obama make? (likely none). But take a state like Nebraska that splits its Electoral Votes and all of a sudden both candidates show up in the state. President Obama's campaign made several stops in either Omaha (or next door in Council Bluffs) throughout the election cycle.

Moving to a popular vote obviously isn't the solution either. If the popular vote was used to elect our president, only the most populated states would receive representation. The power would be concentrated in those few states while the smaller states would lose representation. Our forefathers didn't trust an uneducated populace to elect a qualified candidate to the office of President. The Electoral College was to serve as a check and balance to prevent manipulation over time by foreign governments or others. It was also to guarantee representation to the smaller and less populated states in the union.

Moving from the Electoral College to a National Popular Vote would not only be dangerous, but virtually impossible. It would require a Constitutional Amendment requiring 38 states to ratify the amendment. The smaller less populated states wouldn't hand over their representation, but that hasn't stopped the threat!

Recently, officials from the larger states have made a push to circumvent the power and representation of the less populated states in their union through a 'National Popular Vote Compact'. The compact between member states pledges the entirety of their electoral votes to the candidate who wins the national popular vote. The compact renders the Electoral College Process irrelevant. Through the compact, the required 270 electoral votes required to elect POTUS could be accomplished through as little as 11 states, rather than the 38 required to amend the U.S. Constitution. The compact has already been enacted by eight states and D.C., garnering a total of 132 electoral votes (California, D.C., Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Vermont and Washington). Half way there!!! The National Popular Vote Compact has already received tremendous bi-partisan support from elected representatives and have been largely endorsed by the main stream media. Polls continue to show large support for the National Popular Vote Compact with Americans favoring the National Popular Vote to the Electoral College 2 to 1. How can this be Constitutional?  It is simply a plan to circumvent the Constitution.

Voter fraud has become an increasingly relevant threat to the credibility of our election process. Splitting the electoral votes effectively addresses the problem of fraud by making it more difficult to focus strategies at specific areas, and it decreases the damage done through voter fraud as less electoral votes are stolen at one time.

It would be naive to expect leaders of the more populated states to get on board, but fortunately America is still a representative form of government and the true power lies with the people.  I propose tackling this issue on a state by state basis through the initiative and referendum process guaranteed to us under the First Amendment. That's right...good ol' fashioned petitions and voter drives. Through educating the voters and pushing a strong GOTV effort. It CAN be done. As a former resident of San Diego California, I know how it feels to live in a state where your vote truly is not represented, but I have also participated in the successful recall of a democratic governor (Gray Davis) in one of the bluest of all states. As I previously stated, Americans crave better representation!!!

A Review of MY Predictions from Day After Election 2008

October 31, 2012 -

-Bryan Baumgart

On the night of Election Day 2008, after it became painfully evident that the democrats had not only gained control of the White House but also super majorities in both houses of congress, I made some predictions for obama's first term in a post titled "And The Wait Is On".

I want to look back on that post and those predictions now:

1.) Iran WILL achieve nuclear capability within the next 4 years. Because of our overextended millitary and Obama's anti-war stance he has sold to the public, the United States will be relegated to the sidelines while the rest of the world waits on our decision.

With Iran's promise to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, Obama will demand Israel hold off on pre-emptive strikes until the Iranian nukes begin falling in Israel and Obama is FORCED to finally get in the game.

 * Though I will admit that Iran hasn't fully achieved nuclear capability at this time, it has actually EXPANDED uranium enrichment and it is now estimated (for the exact reasons I predicted), Iran could achieve weapons grade uranium within weeks and a nuclear device within months.

2.) Fundamentalist Islamic insurgents will overthrow the current democratically elected governement in Iraq and make it the center for the world's terrorist organizations such as Al Qaida, focusing on training, recruiting and re-organizing their jihad. Not to mention the certain genocide that will follow the overthrow of the current Iraqi government. Once again, Obama's anti-Iraqi war stance along with his pride will relegate the United States to the sidelines while the rest of the world waits on our decision.

* It is only fair to admit that I am only partially correct on this prediction as far as specific details; however, I am accurate if you remove the specific country (Iraq) from the statement. Iraq certainly has become a hotbed for Islamic insurgents evidenced by my post on Monday. And we are all aware of the consequences of the Arab Spring movement, which left majorities of the middle east controlled by or sympathetic to anti-American terrorist organizations.  The consequences have been devastating thus far.  One has only to look to the recent terrorist attacks against the American consulate in Benghazi Libya as proof.

3.) America will experience another terrorist attack on the same level or greater than the Septer 11th attacks sometime within the next 6 years. While the Bush administration can be credited with keeping the United States safe and free from future terrorist attacks for all 7 years following the September 11th attacks by keeping Al Qaida on the run and taking out much of its upper-level leaders making it impossible for Al Qaida to re-organize, the Obama administration WILL be credited with doing just the opposite. I could go on to guarantee that after America experiences this future terrorist attack because of Obama policies, the Republicans will go on to dominate another decade of American politics.

* While many terrorist attacks on American soil have been thwarted, the attack in Benghazi Libya on the American Consulate certainly constitutes a terrorist attack on American soil! It would be hard to argue that this attack was on the same level as the attacks carried out on September 11, 2001...but certainly these attacks were devastating for our country.  And unlike the actions of President Bush in 2001, it is revealed that President obama actually played a key role in the outcome and cover-up of the attacks in Libya which left four Americans dead. Note that I said within SIX years.  Because of the deteriorating condition of the middle-east and the increased influence of anti-American terrorist organizations abroad thanks to obama's policies, I stick by my prediction for the next two years!

4.) Russia will not only invade Georgia but also move on to the Ukraine and other former territories of the Soviet Union.

5.) Venezuela's Hugo Chavez will begin his goal of realizing the dream of Simon Bolivar by invading Columbia and daring Obama to act.

* I was mostly wrong on both accounts. You have to admit though, that both countries have become increasingly emboldened over the past four years, and have dramatically stepped up their move toward communism. Their cooperation with Iran and other American foes have left us in a precarious situation.  It's no wonder that the dictators of both countries support obama.

6.) Obama's tax policies will make it impossible for our economy to recover, thus...our millitary will weaken and our national security will follow!!

* I get to claim 100% accuracy on this one!!!  Not only has obama increased the deficit over $5,005,000,000,000.00 so far, it is projected to get much worse. The job loss under obama has been so staggering that unemployment actually went down because so many people quit looking for work after all hope of ever finding a job had been destroyed. Tuition is up, food prices are up, gas prices are WAY up, and so is spending under obama. He has spent $16,096,000,000,000.00 so far and plans another $3.72 trillion dollars for 2013.  And this is only the amount congress approved for him.  He actually requested much more. His proposed budget was so crazy that it received ZERO votes; not even a single democrat would back it!  As obama has pointed out recently, he plans to allow the Bush era tax cuts to expire which means EVERYONE'S taxes increase (including the middle class).  It means less money for job creators to create jobs which means unemployment will continue to be stagnant. When obamacare kicks in (the largest tax increase in American history), the middle class will be hit hardest.

What does this mean for the military?  Well as obama also pointed out, he plans to let sequestration go into effect which will effectively gut the military of 10% of it's budget. The Office of Management and Budget wrote, "The report leaves no question that the sequestration would be deeply destructive to national security, domestic investments and core government functions.”

Of course this economic crisis brought on by the democrats may end up being a blessing in disguise for America. Hopefully their won't be money in the treasury for Obama to seek his proposal for national healthcare. Otherwise I would be predicting the mass exodus of doctors out of America and the looming failure of the United States healthcare system.

* Well, I stand corrected!!!  No lack of funding was going to stop this crazy spender from pushing obamacare through!!!  It hasn't even kicked in yet and the doctor shortages are being reported, and with them...the ridiculously long waits for simple procedures as the quality of care has already begins to plummet. A current shortage of over 13,000 doctors is expected to increase ten fold under obamacare.  It has already hit us close to home here in Omaha, where the World Herald reported yesterday that "Thirty-eight employees at the Nebraska Medical Center will lose their jobs by the end of the year, and 100 open positions will remain unfilled as officials prepare for the looming healthcare reforms (aka: obamacare).

I certainly can't say this was fun reminiscing on my predictions from four years ago and realizing the true consequences of obama's presidency.  It is my hope that by doing so, we can avoid the same mistakes we made on that fateful day on November 4, 2008, and provide our country with some long overdue HOPE!!!

BREAKING!!! CIA’s Requests for Help in 9/11 Benhazi Attack Denied as White House Watched LIVE

US military including Special Ops nearby were ordered to stand down & not help as White House watched four Americans brutally murdered and three Libyan prisoners freed. obama makes up youtube video lie to cover-up his actions then lies to American public and UN.  

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/

The truth is coming out now.  Just heard from high ranking officers that said “Ambassador in Peril” coded alert went out immediately as the initial assault begin.  The alert is instantaneous and goes out to the White House Watch Room and EXTREMIS (Special Ops) closest to Benghazi (Sigonella, Italy). After receiving the instant alert the EXTREMIS team would be ordered ready to act within five minutes, and would have been ready and waiting for orders from POTUS.  The watch member at the White House would immediately get the alert to his senior commander who immediately gets POTUS on the line for orders.  The administration is blaming the catastrophe on mixed intel and obama is saying he didn’t know right away, but it doesn’t add up. According to protocol he would have been alerted immediately and HE would have made the decision not to act to save the ambassador and other three Americans. EXTREMIS would have been awaiting HIS decision and standing orders are to “Preserve American Life” so if obama wouldn’t have made a decision (which he certainly did)…then they would have gone in to save the Americans.  The ONLY reason they wouldn’t go in is if ordered NOT to by POTUS.

Just listened to an interview of the father of one of the two fallen former NAVY SEALs. (Woods and Dorherty). They were at a secure CIA annex a mile away from the embassy and heard the attacks.  They asked for permission to go help the Americans at the embassy, but were ordered to stand down. As the attack continued the asked again and were again told to stand down. Three requests to help were denied so Woods and Doherty ignored the orders and rushed to the embassy to help the Americans.  All four Americans were killed because of the White House orders not to allow the Special Ops or help of any kind.  The targets were even pinpointed with lasers by a security officer on the roof and help would have been as easy as allowing bombs to be dropped on the targets by a robotic plane (Specter gunship) in the area (common practice). Four Americans brutally murdered in the seven hour attack because obama repeatedly refused extra security when requested, then repeatedly refused to allow help during the attack. WHY? And why make up the youtube video lie to cover-up? Something is REALLY fishy here!!!  

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/10/26/ac-130u-gunship-was-on-scene-in-benghazi-obama-admin-refused-to-let-it-fire/ 

 

CIA Director Petraeus Throws Blame to Obama

Breaking news on Benghazi: the CIA spokesman, presumably at the direction of CIA director David Petraeus, has put out this statement: "No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. ” 

So who in the government did tell “anybody” not to help those in need? Someone decided not to send in military assets to help those Agency operators. Would the secretary of defense make such a decision on his own? No.

It would have been a presidential decision. There was presumably a rationale for such a decision. What was it? When and why—and based on whose counsel obtained in what meetings or conversations—did President Obama decide against sending in military assets to help the Americans in need? 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/petraeus-throws-obama-under-bus_657896.html